Skip to main content

Full text of "Shall our higher education be Christian or infidel"

See other formats





3 9004 01464072 3 

(§wmB Untuerattg 



TSo. I. 

Shall our Higher Education be 
Christian or Infidel ? 



"Any system of school training which sharpens and strengthens the intellectual 
powers, without at the same time affording a source of restraint und countercheck 
to their tendency to evil, is a curse rather than a blessing." — VictorCousin. 

Qaxonto : 



Note. — Having reason to believe that large numbers of thoughtful 
men, whose opinions seldom find expression through the Press of the 
country, are in substantial accord with the views expressed in this Tract, 
the Author invites correspondence from such on the general question, 
and the best means of securing the desired end. Correspondents will 
oblige by intimating whether their letters are to be regarded as private, 
or otherwise. 

S^ Copies of the Tract will be supplied at cost to any who may 
think it worthy of general circulation. 


IVo. I. 




AT intervals for more than fifty years the question of Higher 
Education has agitated the thought of this country, and 
passing events seem to indicate that once more it must be the 
subject of careful enquiry. Within the next decade — perhaps half 
that time — important questions affecting the educational policy of 
the country, especially of Ontario, will have to be settled, and a 
direction will be given to the currents of scholarship that in after 
years will be very hard to turn. It is important, therefore, 
that the currents now set in motion be guided in safe directions, 
and that the policy adopted be such as will conserve the best 
interests of the State. The real facts must be brought to light ; 
the prejudice that has enshrouded the question must be dis- 
persed ; the principles which are to underlie and guide our edu- 
cational policy must be discussed, and a safe path marked out, if 
possible, for the future. In a word, the all-important question 
of Higher Education must be settled in such wise as shall meet 
the just demands of the people at large, and bring the advantages 
of liberal culture, under the best and safest auspices, within 
reach of the largest number of the young men — and young 
women too — of the nation. 

Waiving subordinate points and side-issues, the great questions 
to be settled are these : — 


4 Higher Education. 

1. Shall Higher Education be entirely secular, or shall the 
religious element, in the form of Christian evidences and Chris- 
tian ethics, be incorporated with the educational system of the 
country ? 

2. Can the work of Higher Education be done most efficiently 
by several independent universities, each with its own affiliated 
schools, or by a single university with confederated colleges ? 

3. Is it the duty of Government to provide entirely for the 
Higher Education of the country, or merely to aid and encourage 
independent universities in providing for it ? 

Each of the preceding questions is important ; each is worthy 
of discussion ; but I shall confine myself, in the present paper, to 
the first of the three. So far as this aspect of the problem is 
concerned, we live in perilous times. In some quarters there is 
not merely a disposition to undervalue the religious element in 
education, there is a disposition to ignore it altogether, — to 
separate it utterly from our educational system, —to cast it 
out as unworthy a place in the curricula of our universities. 
Men sometimes speak of " Science and Religion," or " Culture 
and Religion," as though they were things entirely separate and 
distinct; while some speak of the "conflict" of science and re- 
ligion, and others try to "reconcile" science and religion, as if 
they were positively antagonistic. The thought is misleading ; 
the divorce is unnatural. Culture and religion are not antagon- 
istic ; the one is the completion, or, rather let me say, the one is 
the soul of the other. 

I do not propose to defend the religious element in education. 
With those who understand the question it needs no defence, but 
at once commends itself by its adaptation to the needs of the 
human mind. A non-Christian system of education needs 
defence, and'in the near future will require all the arguments 
that can be mustered in its support. It has been too much the 
fashion to treat what has been justly called a godless education 
with great deference, as though it were master of the situation, 
and could dictatelts own terms. I repudiate the concession. A 
national system of education which excludes the religious ele- 
ment is a national wrong, and I do not hesitate to impeach it as 
a standing menace to national freedom and national stability,, 
dangerous alike to the individual and to the State. 

Christian or Infidel — which ? 5 

I. A Non-Christian Education is Defective. 

In the nature of things it must be so, because it omits a vast 
amount of important truth. Considering the wide range of sub- 
jects open for investigation, human life is far too short to master 
them all; but while we may be compelled to omit some — perhaps 
many — subjects from the curricula of our universities, we should 
see to it that the most important are included, and if character is 
to count for anything, there is no subject in the whole range 
of human studies that compares, in point of importance, with the 
great truths of God, and duty, and destiny. If life were limited 
to the few years we spend here, a subject more or less in a course 
of study might be of little moment ; but those who plan for a 
purely secular education, leave out the tremendous fact of man's 
immortality, and thus make a huge mistake at the very start. If 
man were only a superior animal, something might be said in 
favour of purely secular education ; but with an immortal nature 
to be trained and developed, what can be said for a system which 
expends its efforts upon one part of man's complex nature, 
leaving the higher and more important part untouched and un- 
cared for ? It is a trite saying that " knowledge is power," but 
it is a power for good only as it is controlled by religious truth, 
which fills the mind with the noblest conceptions of God, of per- 
sonal responsibility, and of a future state. 

The most serious defect in a non-Christian education is that it 
supplies no adequate force for the development of moral character. 
If it be said that intellectual culture is sufficient for this purpose, 
I need only reply in the words of Herbert Spencer — a by no 
means partial witness— that " the belief in the moralizing effects 
of intellectual culture, flatly contradicted by facts, is absurd." If 
it be said that aesthetic culture is a sufficient substitute, I call 
upon John Euskin — no mean authority — to reply, and this is his 
answer : " The period of perfect art is the period of decline. At 
the moment when a perfect picture appeared in Venice, a perfect 
statue in Florence, a perfect fresco in Koine, from that hour for- 
ward, probity, industry, and courage were exiled from their 
walls." And if it be said that our colleges and universities should 
confine themselves strictly to secular topics, leaving religious truth 
to the Church and the Sunday-school, I cite Victor Cousin to the 

6 Higher Education. 

stand, and I hear him testify that " any system of school train- 
ing which sharpens and strengthens the intellectual powers, with- 
out at the same time affording a source of restraint and counter- 
check to their tendency to evil, is a curse rather than a blessing." 

II. A Non-Christian Education is Untrue. 

The primary object of all true education is to teach the indi- 
vidual mind to think; and this ability to think should be made to 
pervade universal society. If we have labourers, their pickaxes 
and shovels should think ; if we have artizans, their spindles and 
shuttles should think ; if we have mechanics, their saws and 
planes, their anvils and hammers, their mallets and chisels, 
should think ; and, more important still, if we have voters their 
ballots should think. But while it is important that men should 
think, it is far more important that they should think true 
thoughts ; and our colleges and universities must largely 
decide whether the thought of the future shall be false or 

Now, I maintain that no man can think truly on any important 
subject who has not learned to think as a Christian, because 
without this qualification he is as one who omits the chief facts 
from his data, and the major premise from his argument. Does 
a man think truly in natural science who sees in all the pheno- 
mena of matter only the play of natural forces, and in its com- 
binations only a fortuitous concourse of atoms ? Does he think 
truly in history who never sees God's finger in the destinies of 
nations, nor hears His footfall in the march of the centuries ? 
Does he think truly in anatomy or physiology, who sees no evi- 
dence of Divine wisdom in the human frame, so " fearfully and 
wonderfully made ?" I trow not. And as he does not think 
truly who excludes God from his thinking, so neither does he 
teach truly. He teaches only half-truths at best, and a half-truth 
is often as pernicious as a positive lie. 

III. A Non-Christian Education Tends toward Infidelity 

and Atheism. 
This must be its tendency in the nature of things ; this is its 
tendency as matter of fact. We must remember that education 
is carried on by a two-fold process, — the knowledge communi- 

Christian or Infidel — which? 7 

cated and the impressions produced. The one largely determines 
what the studeut shall know ; the other determines what he shall 
become. Now what are the impressions that will inevitably be 
left upon the mind of a youth by an education that is purely 
secular ? As a rule, the impressions will be that religion is a very 
secondary matter ; that it has no legitimate connection with 
mental development ; that it is out of place in the spheres of 
philosophy and science, and is antagonistic to the advanced 
thought of the age. If, under these circumstances, a student 
retains his belief in the Bible, and his reverence for God 
and religion, it is not because of his education, but in spite 
of it. 

Some, I am aware, maintain a contrary opinion ; but they over- 
look most important facts. They seem to take for granted that a 
human mind is but like a glass vessel in which a certain 
quantity of something we call " knowledge " is stored, which 
can be drawn upon at pleasure, but which has no effect upon 
the texture of the vessel ; that whether the contents are health- 
ful food, corrosive acids, or deadly poison, the glass remains 
uninjured. This is a terrible mistake. Knowledge introduced 
into, and impressions made upon, the mind do not remain dis- 
tinct from it. They are woven into the very texture, so to 
speak, of the mind itself, giving new directions to thought, 
new colourings to our perceptions of truth, and a new bias 
to the moral nature. Moreover the years usually spent in college 
are the very years when the human mind receives its most 
decisive bent; when teaching, combined with surrounding in- 
fluences, will do most to determine what the future character 
shall be, — the years, in a word, when thought crystallizes into 
lasting conviction ; when a permanent direction is given to 
moral tendencies ; when habits both of thinking and acting 
receive a bias which is not easily changed. 

As a rule, the influence of purely secular colleges has been dis- 
astrous upon the thought of those who have been educated in 
them. I say as a rule, because there are exceptions to this rule 
as to every other. But the exceptions have been where colleges, 
entirely secular as regards the curriculum, have been manned by 
Christian professors whose character and influence compensated, 
to some extent at least, for the absence of religious truth from 

8 Higher Education. 

the course of study. But where this compensating element is 
not found, the effects are always disastrous. If some reader 
suggests that my theory is contradicted by facts, I sadly answer, 
Not so; the facts prove my theory, as they who have given 
careful attention to the subject know right well. This is the case 
in the United States, where some prominent State universities 
have become so notoriously anti-Christian in their influence that 
I am told, on good authority, it is almost an exception for a 
student to go through the course without having his religious 
faith undermined, or at least greatly shaken. In India similar 
results have happened on a large scale. In that country colleges 
and a university were established, from which all Christian 
teaching was rigorously excluded. Western philosophy and 
science soon upheaved the foundations of Eastern superstition, 
and heathenism > among the students tottered to its fall. But 
alas! the education which was digging, really though uninten- 
tionally, at the foundations of heathenism, put nothing better in 
its place, and so disastrous have been the results that, within a few 
years, leaders of thought in India, including persons high in 
office, have been discussing the advisableness of handing over the 
State colleges to the Churches, as the only means of saving the 
country from the leadership of a generation of educated atheists. 

IV. A Non- Christian Education is Fraught with Peril to 

the State. 
The foundation of national safety is national virtue, the 
moral sentiments of the people, rectitude in the private life of 
the citizen. But moral sentiments and moral rectitude must be 
sustained by adequate moral forces, and these Christianity alone 
supplies. To quote the emphatic language of Washington, — 
" Keason and experience both forbid us to expect that national 
morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principles." All 
history testifies that intellectual culture is no safeguard from 
moral vileness, ending in national degeneration and decay. 
Egypt, once in the van of civilization and learning, is to- 
day "the basest of nations," and the once mighty empires of 
Greece and Eome tell the same sad story. Where shall we find 
such philosophy, such oratory, such art, as in the land that gave 
to the world a Horner, a Pericles, a Demosthenes, an Aristotle ? 

Christian or Infidel — which ? 9 

Where shall we find such jurisprudence, such statesmanship, 
such eloquence, as in the empire that could boast of a Justinian, 
a Caesar, a Cicero, and a Tully ? But where are Greece and Rome 
to-day ? They have fallen. Their civilization lacked the conserving 
element : the salt was without savour, and was cast out to be 
trodden under feet of men. 

Such examples are full of warning. The causes which led to 
national downfall then, are in operation to-day, and history may 
repeat herself nearer home than we apprehend. If our civiliza- 
tion is to be progressive and permanent ; if our institutions are 
to rest upon solid foundations ; if freedom is to 

" Broaden slowly down 
From precedent to precedent ;" 

if our liberties are to rest secure in the guardianship of public 
morality, our colleges and universities, where the leaders of 
thought are trained, must be permeated through and through with 
the principles of New Testament Christianity. In the words of 
De Tocqueville, — " Despotism may govern without religious faith, 
but liberty cannot." A lofty morality is the only sufficient safe- 
guard of the liberties of a free people, but " morality," says Dr. 
J. P. Newman, " without God as its authoritative reason, is but a 
social compact, a human stipulation, to be broken at will or 
enforced against will." 

If I were considering the case of a pagan nation, my proposi- 
tion would be conceded almost without demur. Let us take 
Japan as an illustration. There a vast nation has suddenly 
awakened from centuries of intellectual slumber. They have 
thrown open their gates to Western civilization, and the most 
marked feature of the awakening is a universal craving for 
education, — a craving so strong that to satisfy it the Government 
has organized a system of education embracing more than 50,000 
Common Schools, a number of High Schools, Normal Training 
Schools for both men and women, and an Imperial University, 
said, by those who know the facts, to be equal in its equipment 
and in the ability of its professors to Oxford or Cambridge. The 
most superficial thinker cannot fail to see that these schools and 
colleges will be mighty factors in moulding the national char- 
acter, and that they will largely determine what the future of 

10 Higher Education. 

the nation is to be. If now I submit the question,—" Ought 
Japan to have an education purely secular, or one permeated 
throughout by Christian truth and Christian influences?" scarce 
anyone will hesitate to reply, "The hope of Japan is in 
Christian education." 

If, then, a purely secular education is unsafe for the awaken- 
ing intellect of a heathen nation, on what principle is it safe for 
the growing intellect of a professedly Christian nation ? unless 
it be on the supposition that we have advanced so far as to 
have no further need of God. It is confessed that when lay- 
ing the foundations of an abiding civilization, an education 
with the savour of Christian truth is good ; but some appear 
to think that so soon as the nation has got beyond its infancy, 
the savour can safely be dispensed with. " Be not deceived : 
God is not mocked. Whatsoever a man " — or a nation — "soweth, 
that shall he also reap ;" and the nation that sows the wind of a 
godless education, must reap the whirlwind of a swift and hope- 
less decay. 

V. What is " Eeligious " Education ? 

Holding, as I do, the views already indicated, it need hardly 
be said that I plead for religious education in our colleges and 
universities. But let me not be misunderstood. What is " re- 
ligious " education ? Not sectarian education, as some would 
have us believe; though, for that matter, I would rather have my 
boy taught by the most pronounced sectarian, provided he were a 
godly man, than by the most brilliant professor who ruled 
Christ and the Bible out of his lecture-room. The cry against 
"sectarian " education has been made to do duty on more than 
one occasion in the history of this country. Some have used 
it ignorantly, some thoughtlessly, and some for a purpose,— 
that is, as a convenient way of exciting prejudice against a move- 
ment that gave promise of competing successfully with an edu- 
cational monopoly, and of placing the advantages of higher 
culture, under religious auspices, within reach of all. But I plead 
for religious — not sectarian — education ; for there may be quite 
a difference between the two. 

Further, by " religious " I do not mean theological education. 

Christian or Infidel — which ? 1 1 

This is another mistake made by many : they confound religion 
with theology, and then seem to regard theology as something 
to be kept distinct from other studies and pursuits ; and so 
they say, let our sons get their education in secular colleges, and 
then let the Churches have their theological schools in which 
to teach religion to those who are preparing for the Christian 
ministry. I deprecate the misapprehension, as it is with some ; 
I protest against the misrepresentation, as it is with others. 
The religious education for which we plead does not mean the 
study of sectarian theology. What, then, it may be asked, do 
you mean by religious education ? I mean — 

1. Colleges and universities under Christian oversight and 

2. Chairs occupied by Christian professors in all the depart- 

3. A curriculum which, while providing for the highest intel- 
lectual culture, does not overlook the moral nature, but embraces 
at least these fundamentals of religious truth — Christian evi- 
dences and Christian ethics. 

VI. Such an Education is an Urgent Need of the Times. 

I plead for such a system for the sake of our sons. If we 
knew that a year hence those sons, in crossing a wide and 
deep river, would be suddenly plunged into its rushing current, 
the knowledge would change some of our plans, at least, in regard 
to their training. Not a day would be lost in teaching them 
to swim, and perhaps not satisfied with this we would provide 
the best life-preservers money could buy, and would have the 
lads carefully instructed how to use them. The illustration is 
none too strong. In a few years our boys will be plunged into 
a sea where they must swim or drown, and where nothing but 
fixed religious principles will have buoyancy enough to keep 
their heads above water, and sustain them until they reach 
the other side. Our sons, as they go forth to life's great battle, 
must face the same problems and grapple with the same foes 
that we have had to encounter. Shall we, then, send them 
forth unprepared, — utterly unarmed and defenceless ? Oh, 
surely not ! But will an education that is purely secular supply 

12 Higher Education. 

the needed armour of proof? Nay ; not hing but "the armou 
of righteousness on the right hand and on the left" can pos 
sibly shield them in the strife. If my statements seem extra 
vagant, listen at least to the words of Professor Huxley whon 
one is almost surprised to find on this side of the question- 
" There must be moral substratum to a child's education to make 
. it valuable, and there is no other source from which this can be 
obtained at all comparable to the Bible." 

You may ask what difference it makes who teaches my boj 
chemistry, biology, anatomy, astronomy, or the like. It may 
make a tremendous difference, both in regard to what he is 
taught and how it is taught; for often the tone and spirit of a 
professor goes farther than the instruction he gives in deter- 
mining what a student shall become. In that most critical 
period of life when intellect is fairly awaking ; when the youth 
is just becoming conscious of the mental power that has been 
slumbering within him; when he longs to explore new and 
untried regions; when he craves a wider freedom, and regards 
with suspicion whatever claims authority over his thoughts or 
actions ; when he begins to regard intellectual culture as the 
highest possible good, and looks up to his professors as 
incarnations of wisdom, from whose dicta there can be no 
appeal ; at such a time the teaching and influence of the 
lecture-room may make all the difference between moral safety 
and moral shipwreck. 

If, for example, my boy is engaged in the study of biology, 
does it make no difference whether he hears from his profes- 
sor's lips that God is the only Author and Giver of life, or 
is told that life, so far from being a Divine gift, is only a spon- 
taneous generation from lifeless matter ? If he is studying the 
structure and laws of the human frame, does it make no differ- 
ence whether he is taught to recognize Divine power and wis- 
dom in the marvellous adaptation of means to ends, saying 
with the Psalmist, " I am fearfully and wonderfully made. 
Thine eyes did see my substance, yet being imperfect ; and in 
Thy book all my members were written, which in continuance 
were fashioned when as yet there was none of them;" or, on the 
other hand, is taught to believe that he is but the product of a 
blind Force ; that he came, by some unlucky accident, from the 

Christian or Infidel — which? 13 

rkness of the past, and is speeding swiftly toward the deeper 
rkness beyond ? If he is studying the wonders of the starry uni- 
rse, does it make no difference whether the lectures to which 
listens be in the spirit of trie Psalmist's confession, " The 
avens declare the glory of God, and the firmament showeth 
is handiwork;" or in the spirit of the French atheist who said, 
Che heavens declare only the glory of Laplace and Leverrier ? " 
a ! yes ; it does make a difference, — an incalculable difference, 
■a difference that can be measured only by celestial diameters, 
plead for religious education for the sake of the nation, 
atthew Arnold has told us that the hope of the world is in its 
ges and its saints. In other words, Wisdom and Eighteousness 
e the twin forces to save society from corruption and decay. The 
mark is good, though not particularly original. The principle 
as recognized by God, if not by man, far back in human history. 
|i righteous men would have saved Sodom ; the seven thou- 
nd who had not bowed the knee to Baal were the conserving 
rce in Israel; and this consensus of Old Testament teaching is 
nphasized and confirmed in the New by the declaration of 
irist concerning His disciples, " Ye are the salt of the 

The future of this nation will depend upon the extent to which 
1 its institutions — social, commercial, political — are permeated 
f religious principles, and this, in turn, will depend upon the 
ucation we give our sons and daughters. He must be blind 
ideed who sees no necessity for higher and better principles in 
Dth political and commercial life. Unless there be improve- 
tent in these directions, the future forebodes disaster. Nay, 
nless a powerful conserving element can be infused, there is no 
rospect before us but universal corruption and dishonesty. If 
lis be so, it may be said the Churches are to blame. Perhaps 
3; and tliey are to blame, if at all, just because they are suffer- 
ag the education of our young men to become non-Christian, — a 
are prelude to its becoming anti-Christian. This is where the 
emedy must be applied : religious principles must be inwoven 
rith the moral fibre of our young men in the process of 
ducation, and not be put on as a convenient veneering after- 

H Higher Education. 


The issues are far more serious than most persons seem 
know. The real question as between the Christian and 
infidel in this land is not the inspiration of the Bible, and the 
thousand and one questions which grow out of that; but it is 
whether the spirit of our educational system is to be secular oi 
religious, and whether it is to be controlled by the Christian or by 
the infidel ? Some one may say I am putting this too strongly 
that there are numbers of people who are by no means infidels, 
and even many who claim to be Christians, who think that re- 
ligion is out of place in school or college. But a moment's 
reflection will show that such persons, whether consciously or 
not, are putting themselves on the infidel's platform, and are 
reasoning along his lines. The only difference is, that while he 
perceives the logical outcome of his argument, the others do not. 
He^demands a purely secular education; they join with him, 
though not with the same end in view ; but while the methods 
are alike, the results cannot be widely different. He would have 
a nation of atheists, made such by their education ; they would 
have a nation of Christians, who are such in spice of their educa- 
tion. He would annihilate all belief in the existence of a per- 
sonal God— all respect for His character— all reverence for His 
law ; they would retain these things in the church and the home, 
though joining to exclude them from the college and the school. 
But the result is the same. Between them both, Christ must 
seek the shelter of the manger, because there is no room for Him 
in the inn. He must be relegated to the companionship of the 
ignorant and the lowly, because they can find no room for Him 
in the misnamed culture of this a^e. 


If we are to have the Christian element recognized in 
Higher Education, we must have colleges and universities planted 
upon Christian foundations and under Christian control. In 
colleges endowed and controlled by the State, the religious ele- 
ment must be ignored. They can take no account of it either in 
authorizing the curriculum or in appointing the professors. But 
may not the professors in a State college be Christian men ? 
Assuredly they may be, but we have no guarantee that they will 

Christian or Infidel — which ? 15 

be. Such appointments will be made — unless party considera- 
tions intervene — solely on the ground of ability to teach the re- 
quired branches, viewed from a purely secular standpoint, and 
the religious character or views of the candidate cannot be con- 
sidered at all. Moreover, in the sudden changes which result 
from party government, it is quite within the possibilities that 
we may some day have a Minister of Education who would 
regard religious skepticism as a recommendation rather than an 
objection, and hence the Chair that is filled by a Christian to-day 
may be filled by an atheist to-morrow. 

But how can we have Christian colleges ? Only through the 
Churches. How can they be adequately endowed and sustained ? 
Chiefly by private liberality. It is held by some — perhaps by 
many — that it is the duty of the State to provide every requisite 
for Higher Education. I question the correctness of the theory, 
as I do the soundness of the policy. That it is the duty of the 
State to provide for primary education, and even to make it 
compulsory, is clear, because illiteracy is the prolific parent of 
vice and crime ; but in the matter of Higher Education, which 
partakes somewhat of the character of a luxury, it may be the 
duty of the State to aid and encourage it, but not to provide for 
it entirely. State aid should be an encouragement to private 
benevolence, not a substitute for it ; and grants of public money 
for Higher Education should be conditioned, both in direction and 
amount, by the principle of helping those who help themselves. 

It is possible that these lines may be read by some who recog- 
nize the solemn trust of stewardship, and who sincerely desire so 
to fulfil the trust that at the last the "well done" of the 
Master will be theirs. Sometimes, perhaps, you are in doubt as to 
the best way of investing your Lord's money, so that it may yield 
the largest returns in glory to God and good to men, because you 
see that much that is given in charity, so called, seems to pro- 
duce no good, or at least no lasting, results. Ear be it from me 
to dissuade you from helping the poor because results seem so 
small; but I would fain show you "a more excellent way," and it is 
this : Let a portion of your wealth be given to aid in endowing 
Christian colleges and universities, and thus put in operation agen- 
cies that will work for the good of thousands long after you have 

1 6 Higher Education. 

passed to your reward. Ye give your money in daily charity, and 
ye do well ; but the dole of to-day will be spent ere to-morrow, 
and the effect upon society is nil. Ye help to provide refuges 
for the destitute, and homes for God's suffering poor, and ye do 
well; but although the suffering inmates are sheltered and com- 
forted, they send no healthful influence abroad, and the grace of 
your benefaction is unfelt beyond the narrow circle that shared 
the benefit. Ye leave wealth to your children, and they may use 
it wisely ; but, on the other hand, the wealth you laboured to 
accumulate may be wasted by others on sinful indulgences ; the 
fortune which held in it unmeasured possibilities of blessing, 
may prove a corroding curse, and the fruit that seemed so fair 
may, like apples of Sodom, turn to caustic ashes on the lip. But 
he who endows a Chair in a Christian university, like one who 
digs a well in a desert, unseals a fountain whose perennial 
waters shall refresh the weary while passing centuries march 
their rounds. He may die, but his work shall live, and its power 
to bless shall grow with each revolving sun. He may pass from 
toil to rest, from labour to reward, but he leaves behind him a 
long succession of representatives, — Christian teachers who shall 
send forth generations of men wise in all the wisdom of the 
schools, and loyal to the heart's core to Christ and His truth ; 
and thus the benefits shall multiply till he who sowed the seed 
shall reap the harvest with vast and abiding increase. 

Copies of this Tract for distribution can be had from 
the Author at the following rates, post-paid : — 

Single Copy, 5 Cents. 

Twelve Copies, - - - - - 50 " 

Thirty " - - - - - $1 00 

Fifty " 1 60 

One Hundred Copies, - - - - 2 50 



Methodist Mission Rooms,